I can just hear that list, the way you’ve laid it out, being read by William S. Burroughs in his “Junky” voice or by Allen Ginsberg in his “Howl” voice!

Scary!

]]>By: Bob Carlsonhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384466
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 22:21:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384466Let’s start with banning “standardized testing” it is all of boring, overly used and scary. Now add “dad, father and belt” all for the same reason. On to “uncle, brother, (big) sister and cousin” because each was abusive in his/her own way. “Teacher” follows closely as does “Principal.” Then we can go off on another tangent with “priest and nun.” I think you get my drift. OMG, “Peanuts!”
]]>By: chgolizhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384350
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 16:22:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384350You have no idea how much your privilege is showing with this statement.
]]>By: chgolizhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384347
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 16:21:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384347A friend who married and had a child earlier than the norm — and thus was going through parenting milestones before others in her peer group — told me many years ago about the time her son came home from taking one of the standardized tests and asked her “what’s a marina?”. She told him, and he was relieved he had gotten it right. She looked at me and asked: “how many inner city kids would know the answer to that?”

A swimming pool conjures up a completely different image to a suburban kid from southern California than to a kid in Detroit. Also, a completely different sense of where one fits in the social landscape.

There have been a lot of experiments showing that subtly reminding someone they are black or female or poor prior to taking a test will cause them to do worse on the test.

Swimming pools aren’t as neutral a subject as you think.

]]>By: John A Arkansawyerhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384336
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:44:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384336Unless the NYC DOE spokeswoman is flatly lying, you can look at the current lessons and see, as the language has been in RFPs “for many years and is meant to ensure that tests contain no possible bias or distractions for students”.

(Putting slavery into a math test, like the travesty in Georgia linked far above, constitutes a distraction. Putting slavery into a history test does not. It’s a pretty simple distinction to make.)

Check the Scope and Sequence documents on this page, and you’ll see “religion, war, slavery [and] nuclear weapons” are indeed taught.

As I note at great length elsewhere, an AP article says something different from the CNN article. It says the tests cover “math, science, literacy and social studies”.

As I also note at great length elsewhere, NYC schools put evolution in a central location for teaching life sciences. Fourth grade proficiency requires “Demonstrates understanding of change over time.” Eighth grade proficiency requires “Demonstrates understanding of evolution, diversity, and adaptation of organisms.” Tenth grade proficiency adds to that “Demonstrates an understanding of biological evolution.”

The English section of their website has a pretty good lesson plan for teaching “Inherit the Wind”, too.

I’m not too worried about the state of teaching evolution in New York City.

]]>By: John A Arkansawyerhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384329
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:07:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384329Sigh. My edit button isn’t visible for the note above. Anyway, in another comment below, I note that the CNN story was incomplete: There’s an AP story which says the tests cover “math, science, literacy and social studies”.

On the other hand, I’m not too worried about New York City’s emphasis on teaching evolution, given what their standards say about it:

Life Sciences Concepts
a Demonstrates understanding of characteristics of organisms.
b Demonstrates understanding of life cycles of organisms.
c Demonstrates understanding of organisms and environments.
d Demonstrates understanding of change over time.

Life Sciences Concepts
a Demonstrates understanding of structure and function in living systems.
b Demonstrates understanding of reproduction and heredity and the role of genes and environment on trait expression.
c Demonstrates understanding of regulation and behavior and response to environmental stimuli.
d Demonstrates understanding of populations and ecosystems and the effects of resources and energy transfer on populations.
e Demonstrates understanding of evolution, diversity, and adaptation of organisms.

Life Sciences Concepts
a Demonstrates an understanding of the cell.
b Demonstrates an understanding of biological evolution.
c Demonstrates an understanding of interdependence of organisms.
d Demonstrates an understanding of matter, energy, and organization in living systems.
e Demonstrates an understanding of evolution, diversity, and adaptation of organisms.
f Demonstrates an understanding of behavior of organisms

]]>By: Daniel Smithhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384327
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:03:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384327If the point of “suggesting that words be avoided”, whatever that means, is to prevent exposing teh children to things that might offend or upset them then it seems a pointless and expensive exercise if half of the curriculum still addresses them. In addition to evolution, how does one teach or test history without reference to religion, war, slavery or nuclear weapons? I’d love to see the lessons that come out of this effort. I wonder whether that in practice, a suggestion to avoid a word will become a ban if for no other reason than to protect the content provider from outright rejection and/or lawsuits.
]]>By: John A Arkansawyerhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384314
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 14:31:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384314Daniel, your last paragraph:

This certainly implies that the ban will apply to all standardized tests, but perhaps the policy is completely half-assed and will apply only to math and english tests. That would make the ban even stupider than it appears at first glance.

says that it is stupider not to ban the word evolution from a test about biology than it is to ban it. (Sentence edited because I got it exactly backward in the original.) I’m thinking Lou Reed applies in more than one direction here:

But you know people get all emotional
And sometimes, man, they just don’t act rational.
They think they’re just on TV

The Department of Education included the list in a recently issued request for proposals to create the tests that would be used to measure student progress in math, science, literacy and social studies.

But it goes on to say this:

A spokeswoman for the department said the list is of topics that are suggested to be avoided, not outright banned, and it’s standard language that’s been included in proposal requests for some time.

“There is no ban on any topic in our tests or curriculum,” spokeswoman Deidrea Miller said in a statement. “This is standard language that has been used by test publishers for many years and is meant to ensure that tests contain no possible bias or distractions for students.

The thing which most concerns me about this supposed problem is whether this has a chilling effect on teaching evolution. This suggests that is not a problem.

I sure would like to read that RFP, though, and I’m having a hard time finding it.

]]>By: Daniel Smithhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384263
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 06:17:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384263That is not what the article says. The article states that

These are a few of the 50-plus words and references the New York City Department of Education is hoping to ban from the city’s standardized tests.

then goes on to say that the list of words was made public

when the city’s education department recently released this year’s “request for proposal” The request for proposal is sent to test publishers around the country trying to get the job of revamping math and English tests for the City of New York.

This certainly implies that the ban will apply to all standardized tests, but perhaps the policy is completely half-assed and will apply only to math and english tests. That would make the ban even stupider than it appears at first glance.

]]>By: John A Arkansawyerhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384254
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 05:34:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384254Biology is not one of the subjects included. The CNN article clearly states “math and English tests”.

There’s a big, big difference between what’s appropriate to teach in the biology classroom — evolution comes to mind as a perfect example–and what’s appropriate to put into a high-stakes test covering math and English.

If the goal is to test reading comprehension or math skills in an equitable* manner, which is the stated goal of these standardized tests, then you want relatively bland and unobjectionable material in them. The last thing a kid raised by evolution deniers (not quite child abuse but still an intellectual disadvantage), a kid trying to do well on an algebra exam and hoping to go to college, needs is to have the further disadvantage of having the ignorance imposed by his parents rubbed in his face while trying to concentrate.

*nothing about standardized testing As We Know It is equitable

]]>By: thivaihttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384235
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 04:31:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384235Another thing to keep in mind is that standardized testing really hates to get all liberal artsy and go across the curriculum. The reason is that a test item could require background knowledge in a content area, such as biology, that would render the item useless as a gauge for testing reading comprehension skills. In other words, if you use a butterfly’s life cycle to test sequence, you run the risk of potentially requiring a student to be familiar with the concept of what a life cycle is before he or she can tell you the sequence. Since you’re supposed to be testing the ability to comprehend a sequence of events, it’s much better to write a dumb story about a kid who runs through his lame-ass day by geting ready for school on a… Saturday (cue ironic trombone) than to try to use a passage about butterfly metamorphosis. Hence, the list.
]]>By: John A Arkansawyerhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384234
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 04:23:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384234Just so everyone is clear on this point: The only subjects being tested are math and English. No one is banning the word “evolution” from a biology test. From the CNN article:

The request for proposal is sent to test publishers around the country trying to get the job of revamping math and English tests for the City of New York.

So, sorry, but you won’t be able to put this question on a math test:

“If the first parent abuses three children five times a week, and the second parent abuses two children seven times a week, which parent commits more acts of abuse in a week?”

I realize there are those for whom that is a startling act of censorship. They are cordially invited to grow the fuck up.

]]>By: thivaihttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384229
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 04:18:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384229This is not true. For grades 1 through 3-4, and for a lot of of grades 4-5 through 9, you don’t need to discuss evolution in biology except as a particular standard of life science (which is part of the trio along with earth and physical sciences). So, 100% of your life science or biology questions for grades 1 through 3-4 will not contain anything about evolution because it is too high of a concept. These kids will learn about adaptations, such as a camel’s hump. After that, at least 90% of your questions can still be about concepts other than evolution.
Secondly, the “testing companies” are not really that but part of educational publishers who also produce state tests. The company that writes the tests is determined through bidding and contracts, so the “testing companies” are really in bed with the department of education people in various states, not “social conservatives,” who, as far as I know in the 12 years I’ve been doing this, have not ordered or adopted textbooks, state tests, or any content of real value.
Finally, I don’t this word list applies to the sciences anyway, as every science test prep product I’ve worked on for NY (3 so far) mentions evolution (when grade level appropriate).
To be sure, politics plays some role in the content we produce, but educational publishers are not the nefarious shadow government screwing with culture and society that your radical “moderate” views would leave you to believe.
]]>By: John A Arkansawyerhttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384232
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 04:18:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384232Biology is not being tested. From the CNN story:

The request for proposal is sent to test publishers around the country trying to get the job of revamping math and English tests for the City of New York.

The politicians who push for accountability in the form of standardized tests are on the take from the testing companies, and are in bed with the social conservatives who want religion, not science, to be a core component of the required curriculum.

]]>By: SoItBeginshttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384220
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 04:05:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384220 7,000 gallons. You can’t lift that stuff, it’s hard as a stone!
]]>By: thivaihttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384221
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 04:05:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384221As someone who writes and edits standardized tests, I can tell you that this word list is really for the doofus freelancers who sometimes think it’s okay to write a story about getting drunk and stealing a car for third graders. You’re seeing a little of how the sausage is made, so of course it looks ridiculous. And it is, to a point. But you have to remember that we’re working from a set of standards first, such as writing something that a kid can identify a decent cause and effect relationship from. It’s never high literature, except when previously published literary pieces are used or adapted.

All of the major educational publishers have a very conservative approach to material, and the justification is that kids have access to trade (bookstore) fiction, which is perverted and weird, so it’s okay that we give them the equivalent of literary hardtack.

These lists are often made in committee, so of course they’re very broad. However, educational publishers do not play to the Mississippi contingent, as Antinous would suggest. Being conservative does not equate to making possum gravy in the swimming pool, and I have rejected a lot of reading comprehension passages for being too rural as to be a foreign experience for the audience we were writing for.

Basically you’re writing for a kid who doesn’t exist using guidelines created by committee and starting with an abstract learning concept. You’re guaranteed to fail.

]]>By: Yorgushttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384219
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 04:03:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384219 Trouble is, the standardized test is supposed to measure learning (either achievement or potential) and biology is one of the subjects included.

Mention of evolution is banned to sanitize the tests and make them acceptable to the corporate conservatives who mandated them in the first place.

]]>By: Yorgushttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384218
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 03:59:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384218 Reminds me of when Jimmy Carter claimed he was attacked by a rabbit.
]]>By: Yorgushttp://boingboing.net/2012/03/30/new-york-city-dept-of-educatio.html#comment-1384217
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 03:58:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=152179#comment-1384217 Teachers are (for the most part) quite capable of assessing student progress without standardized testing. I’ve been a teacher for 24 years. I’m quite capable of following the state core curriculum, writing and executing lesson plans, and creating and using formative and summative tests for my students. Pearson and McGraw-Hill have little or nothing to offer me. Standardized testing exists for two reasons: to fill the pockets of testing companies, and to fill the pockets of the legislators who listen to the testing companies, who fill the legislators’ pockets.